U.S. District Court Judge Explains Why He Enjoined the California Tax Returns-Ballot Law on September 19

On October 1, U.S. District Court Judge Morrison England issued a 24-page opinion, explaining why he had orally enjoined California’s new tax returns-ballot bill on September 19. The judge says the law violates the Constitution in multiple ways: it adds a qualification; it violates voting rights; it violates equal protection; and it is preempted by a federal law that already requires federal employees (including President Trump) to fill out certain financial disclosure forms. It violates equal protection because it doesn’t apply to independent or write-in candidates.

There are five cases combined, but the case listed first in the opinion is the one that was filed first in the eastern district. Jerry Griffin, the first-named plaintiff in that particular case, is a registered Republican voter. Therefore, almost by a random process, this case will probably go down in the history books as Griffin v Padilla.

The opinion says that the law’s proponents have exaggerated when they have said that all presidential candidates starting in the 1970’s revealed their tax returns. Among the presidential candidates listed in the opinion who didn’t release them is Ralph Nader. Also the opinion points out that President Gerald Ford never released his tax returns, although he did release a summary of his tax returns.

Sarasota, Florida Daily Newspaper Carries Op-Ed on Florida Top-Two Initiative

The Sarasota Herald-tribune has this op-ed by the chair of the Florida Republican Party about the top-two initiative that is likely to qualify for the Florida 2020 ballot. State Senator Joe Gruters correctly points out that the top-two initiative is not an initiative for an “open primary.” He also says that while proponents claim their initiative would promote centrist politics, that has not happened in California, which continues to have the most polarized legislature in the nation after nine years of the top-two system.

Iowa State Trial Court Invalidates Some Restrictions for Voter ID

On October 1, an Iowa state trial court struck down parts of a 2017 law that requires voters to show ID at the polls. The law had provided that Iowans with a state drivers license or state ID card could automatically obtain a special voter card that would allow them to vote, if they showed that card. But the law said Iowans without a drivers license or state ID card could not obtain the special voter card automatically. The ruling says that all currently registered voters may obtain the special voter card automatically. Here is the opinion in League of United Latin American Citizens of Iowa v Pate, Polk Co., cv-05643.

South Carolina Republican Voters Sue Party over Cancellation of 2020 Presidential Primary

On October 1, two voters affiliated with the South Carolina Republican Party filed a lawsuit in state court against the state Republican Party. The party executive committee cancelled the presidential primary on September 7. The lawsuit points out that the state party rules clearly say that only the state convention can make that decision. See this story. Thanks to Political Wire for the link.

UPDATE: the case is Inglis v South Carolina Republican Party, filed in the Richland County Court of Common Pleas, 5th jud. circuit.